20 C.F.R. § 404.923
Expedited appeals process—general
By using the expedited appeals process you may go directly to a Federal district court without first completing the administrative review process that is generally required before the court will hear your case.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1973–2022 · leading case: Diane S. P. v. Berryhill, 379 F. Supp. 3d 498 (E.D. Va. 2019).
Diane S. P. v. Berryhill, 379 F. Supp. 3d 498 (E.D. Va. 2019). “1424(d) ; see 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.923 , 416.1423. These regulations indicate, at a minimum, that constitutional issues may be identified before the SSA.”
James Ryan v. Lloyd Bentsen, Sec'y of the Treasury, 12 F.3d 245 (D.C. Cir. 1993). “20 C.F.R. § 404.923 . We conclude that resort to the EAP procedure would not have been futile.”
Cost v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 770 F. Supp. 2d 45 (D.D.C. 2011). “” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.923 , 404.924(d). Cost is challenging not the constitutionality of the windfall elimination provision but rather the provision’s applicability to him.”
Josephine Gullo v. Joseph Califano, Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 609 F.2d 649 (2d Cir. 1979). “…Law Judge is premature since she failed to make a timely request that the Secretary provide such a hearing. See 20 C.F.R. § 404.923 .”
Santos Reyes v. The Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 476 F.2d 910 (D.C. Cir. 1973). “20 C.F.R. §§ 404.923 , 404.934 (1971).f 10 .”
David M. Garcia v. Joseph Califano, Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 625 F.2d 354 (10th Cir. 1980). “927 provides that “the procedure at the hearing generally, except as these regulations otherwise expressly provide, shall be in the discretion of the presiding officer and of such nature as to afford the parties a reasonable opportunity for a fair hearing.”
Cahoon v. Heckler, 574 F. Supp. 1021 (D. Mass. 1983). “20 C.F.R. § 404.923 et seq. The law now provides that a divorced woman eligible for a government pension and about to retire may receive her full Social Security entitlement only if she was married to an insured wage earner for twenty years or more prior to divorce.”
Adams v. Harris, 643 F.2d 995 (4th Cir. 1981). “” 20 CFR §§ 404.923 , 416.1433. The claimant is also advised that he or his representative may inspect the documentary evidence, and they may also inspect the file.”
Buccheri-Bianca v. Heckler, 768 F.2d 1152 (10th Cir. 1985). “Thereafter, plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Secretary for an expedited appeal to the district court pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.923 -.928. The parties stipulated that “[t]he sole issue in dispute is the constitutional application of section 339 of Public Law 98-21,…”
Eugene Sulie v. Richard Schweiker, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 730 F.2d 1069 (7th Cir. 1984). “2d 18 (1976), and (2) Sulie may obtain either general or expedited review as set out in 20 C.F.R. § 404.923 -.928 (1981). This appeal followed.”
Crawford & Co. v. Apfel, 235 F.3d 1298 (11th Cir. 2000). “The applicable regulations governing who may request a disability hearing are 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.923 (a) and 416.1432(a).”
Jackson v. Comm'r Soc. Sec. Admin. (D. Or. 2022). “20 C.F.R. §§ 404.923 , 404.1509, 404.1520(a)(4)(ii).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.